I’ve been reading the blogs and Reddits of people who hate me lately, and all of this has bubbled up in the form of a rant! To wit:
YES I AM A FUCKING FEMINIST.
I am not sure what I have to do to CONVEY this message to some people. Interpretive dance? Commission a plane to drop leaflets around the world that says “Ozy Is A Feminist Blogger”? Put a disclaimer in front of every post that says “I know more about The Second Sex than you do, do not fuck with me”?
I mean, it is just fucking dispiriting to read people arguing against me and saying positions I agree with. I’m not even sure what you do with that. It’s like finding a screed on the Internet going all “I think Ozy Frantz is a stupid fuckhead because zie believes that dinosaurs and humans live at the same time! Dinosaurs and humans didn’t live at the same time, you moron. We have carbon-dating evidence of that!” I know! Stop arguing with me!
Second, I am not interested in dialogue with MRAs. It’s an oddly common idea that if you’re interested in talking about how the patriarchy has disadvantaged men, you want to establish a common ground between MRAs and feminists and resolve their differences and lead us all into a happy utopia of singing Kumbaya and holding hands.
Fuck that shit. That’s like saying that because you think that sex-positivity needs more awareness and validation of the experience of asexuals, low-libido people, and those who only want sex within committed monogamous relationships you should go hang out with the abstinence-only crowd. What the fuck? Why am I going to give up on a movement that, although very flawed, I fundamentally agree with in order to make nice with a movement I don’t?
Don’t get me wrong: if you’re an MRA, and you like NSWATM and get a lot out of it, I’m not going to send my flying monkey minions to stop you from reading it. You’re welcome to comment, as long as you mostly refrain from being a stupid fuckhead, a term which is here defined as “perpetrating rape culture, transphobia, the idea that feminism is the most important cause of sexism against men, or the idea that Trayvon Martin was shot in self-defense on account of he smoked pot.” I am not biased against MRAs, I am biased against stupid fuckheads, who come in all kinds of stupid and fuckheadish disguises.
(Tangential rant: what’s up with this whole “moderate MRAs” and “moderate feminists” shit? Moderation is not necessarily a good thing! A lot of my viewpoints are very extreme compared to the mainstream– complete legalization of sex work, the existence of genders outside the binary, etc. I just happen to be, you know, right.)
And if you personally want to work on building a bridge between MRAs and feminists, knock yourself out. That completely and utterly thankless task can be yours now! I just don’t want to do it, and I’m kind of miffed that it’s assumed that I want to do it just because I’m a feminist talking about men. I don’t want to! I just want to talk about men! Is that allowed?
Third, my pronoun is “zie.” It is really not difficult. And every time you complain about it it just means that, in addition to ameliorating my gender dysphoria, I’m ALSO pissing off people I don’t like. And in case you haven’t noticed, pissing off people I don’t like is like chocolate orgasm Christmas to me.
Wow, I’m sorry for my comment, Hugh is right.
Hah, you reminded me of a rant my friend went on about the usage of “radical” as an insult (eh, anything political gets turned into an insult). Pretty much he complained that racism never would have decreased without people with radical views and actions against slavery, etc..
“I’ve been reading the blogs and Reddits of people who hate me lately, and all…”…
I’ve been reading the blogs and Reddits of people who hate me lately, and all of this has bubbled up in the form of a rant! To wit: YES I AM A FUCKING FEMINIST. I am not sure what I have to do to CONVEY this message to some people. Interpretive dance? …
Well, I’m late to the party, but anyway…
Good article Ozy, but to quote one of my favourite movies,
:Do you have to use so many cuss words?
Yes.
Okay, Dude. Have it your way.
(I’m just teasing)
Speaking of, has someone come up with a gender-neutral word for dude/dudette?
I’m from California; I, personally, use ‘dude’ for literally everyone. Other then that, I don’t have an answer. 🙂
For the record, I was quoting word for word from The Big Lebowski. I was just being silly.
Would ‘Dude*’ do? Or maybe it’s a bit too geeky
@Ozy: I try to avoid taking up labels like “feminist,” because these labels take on different meanings for different people. My own brother thinks that “feminist” is synonymous “misandric” because he’s had bad experiences with people who identified as feminists in the past. I hesitantly adopt the label “egalitarian” when forced to do so, but in general, I circumvent these problems by instead restricting my comments to issues. I just so happen to agree with you on most of your stances on various issues, which also happen to coincide with the stances of some people who identify as feminist. So,… Read more »
This is a good example of how tainted the MRA label is. Just by having a blog which at least by name focus on men Ozy is associated with MRAs by some who then try to revoke/deny zir feminist card. Ozy then goes on to publicly wash zir hands of the MRAs (“I am not interested in dialogue with MRAs”).
Will that be enough remains to be seen.
Applause to Ozy and Tom! Yeah, let’s talk …all of us without shouting the other down…okay, the extremists of each party (ie., MRA’s, Rad Fems, whatever…) will sit at the far end of the table shouting at each other…Okay, I get it…you don’t agree….you have different views on things….can the rest of us just sit down and talk…calmly and rationally…and in Tom’s words, from the heart about ourselves and particular stories…. The fact that I was abused for several years does not negate that some of the men here were abused by females (or by males, too)….And can we get… Read more »
Speaking as a self-identified extremist I have no desire to shout at anybody.
Having said that, tone argument much?
Agreed Not Me. I am certainly not trying to say that anyone’s story is crap no matter their gender orientation, preference, or status might be. But what Zie is, IMO, a political statement first and foremost not a tool to tell a person’s story. You can tell the story of being transgendered and tell an amazing, inspiring story without inventing a new pronoun. Besides this is the good MEN project. By definition the subject is men. All are invited to the discourse. And the discussion of how men deal with sex and gender is certainly an important topic. But in… Read more »
Well Tom if you have a person who wants to tell a story even if not here and they don’t identify as male or female what do they call themselves?
“You can tell the story of being transgendered and tell an amazing, inspiring story without inventing a new pronoun.”
No, actually, sometimes you can’t. Now I can’t speak for Ozy, but I know people who literally do not identify as men or women. They are not ‘he’ and they are not ‘she.’ It’s not political; it’s really personal.
Also, I mean, yeah NSWATM merged with GMP a bit…but it’s maintaining it’s own identity in which the focus isn’t necessarily men. (Again, not trying to speak for Ozy. That’s just what I’m picking up on).
I see “zie” and “hir” as a very simple and pragmatic solution to intersex and non gendered people’s issue with pronouns. I doubt they’d need to politicize it, if people didn’t fight the easy solution. It’s a pronoun. People without a male/female gender aren’t “its” they are something, if not new, then not recognizable in the bigger narrative (story) of gender. So finding an elegant and respectful pronoun seems logical to me. It only becomes political when people aren’t being respected.
You can tell the story of being transgendered and tell an amazing, inspiring story without inventing a new pronoun. But why should it be necessary to do so? Besides this is the good MEN project. By definition the subject is men. All are invited to the discourse. And the discussion of how men deal with sex and gender is certainly an important topic. But in the we are talking about HE not Zie. Ah come now Tom. I’ll be the first to defend this place as a place for men (because heaven knows we need them despite what certain folks… Read more »
@Danny did you read the anthology that was the inspiration for the website? There were 31 stories of men–black, brown, white, gay, straight, rich, poor, famous, and not. Lisa and Johanna, as much as I love them and think they do a great job, were not in the book. The idea here is a nationwide discussion of manhood. That has always been the goal. Certainly women are invited to the party. And issue of gender and sexuality come into play. But as they relate to men. My problem with Zie is that it isn’t about a story it’s about a… Read more »
@Danny did you read the anthology that was the inspiration for the website? There were 31 stories of men–black, brown, white, gay, straight, rich, poor, famous, and not. Lisa and Johanna, as much as I love them and think they do a great job, were not in the book. The idea here is a nationwide discussion of manhood. That has always been the goal. Certainly women are invited to the party. And issue of gender and sexuality come into play. But as they relate to men. I haven’t read it but I understand the need to discuss manhood and I… Read more »
And again I’d ask, if only for accuracy in telling the story and for grammar, if the person is gendered non normatively what pronoun do you use? Calling someone she when that is not The story in hir heart is then denying her hearts story. Does zie just have to default to she even if that isn’t accurate? This is actually important to people, much like being called by ones proper name. If I say you can’t use your own name or your own identity as you tell your story, how do you tell it, Tom? Its a very pragmatic… Read more »
On the pronoun thing, I kind of wish English had a gender-neutral third-person pronoun (which does exist in some languages; in fact, there are also languages which lack gendered pronouns altogether) because even if people outside the binary didn’t exist, it would still clear up a lot of misunderstandings and awkwardness in the cases where someone’s gender is unknown or irrelevant. Also, so long as we don’t get rid of gendered language altogether, it might help a bit if there were gendered first-person pronouns as well (which also exist in real-world languages, though they’re not common)… though fat chance of… Read more »
But Tom isn’t that pronoun and theory about other people trying to tell their own stories and declaring that the pronouns that existed before don’t allow them to tell their individual stories?
I went to a college where Zie is used quite frequently (perhaps the most in the country I would think). My daughter starts there next fall. I think the whole idea is crap. Here’s the thing. I am fine with gender theory, with people who want to get all wrapped up in patriarchy, how men have been screwed in divorce, in sexism, feminism (whatever that means these days…I grew up on a commune with a radical feminist mom), and broad generalizations of how the power dynamic works itself out in our society. It just bores me to death. I care… Read more »
“That has nothing to do with a pronoun or theory and everything to do with how you define your own reality.”
Wait…my understanding on the point of gender neutral pronouns is that the current gendered pronouns don’t reflect some people’s individual realities…
Well said Tom.
The point of zie and similar pronouns is that some people do not identify as male or female; they are trans or androgynous or neither or other. They use new pronouns to define their reality as individuals who do not neatly fall onto either side of the gender binary.
So yeah. What you dismiss as crap is, for many people, one of the most basic tools they need to tell their stories.
I remember going to a “womyn’s” coffee shop in Santa Cruz in the early 1990’s and instead of an “open mike” night, they were having an “open Michelle” night. I’ve always thought that was pretty funny. I’m not sure they were being funny though. I think they were serious. I was in college during the height of the political correctness era, and I always felt that changing language in order to change people’s ideas was kind of Orwellian. But on the other hand, it’s a very common tactic, like the Republicans talking about “death panels” and whatnot. Language can be… Read more »
Okay, “Open Michelle” is just silly. As with objections to “history,” “seminar,” and “niggardly,” it shows a willful ignorance of word origins.
Addendum: it’s weird, but I felt guilty writing “niggardly.” intellectually, I know it has nothing to do with “N*****,” but I still feel uncomfortable with it.
Oh yes. I hate when people say stupid stuff like that. Especially since it’s not “open mike” it’s “open mic”
I once saw somebody claim that the word woman came from the phrase “woe of man.” It’s lucky for them that this was over the internet. If we had been in the same room I likely would have, quite literally, thrown a chair at their face.
I thought the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was mostly accepted by linguists, and the debate was mostly over the strong and weak forms.
Oh yeah, you’ve DEFINITELY been on reddit. I think I might’ve even seen some of the threads you’re talking about.
Wait, what? Why do MRAs and feminists have to be mutually exclusive? I thought it was pretty clear that both males and females are disadvantaged by society. I don’t see why this has to be some kind of war.
Your under the (mistaken) impression that MRAs are typically as reasonable as their name “Men’s rights activists” suggest, but the premise of the movement is “feminism fucked us over, and we oppose everything feminism stands for.” Meeting feminism and anti-feminism in the middle would probably implode the world. But I agree that people for equality focused on women and people for equality focused on men should be able to band together. As a feminist, that’s why I’m comfortable and supportive here at NSWATM. I agree that it’s not like when society was handing out gender advantages, it dumped it all… Read more »
Your under the (mistaken) impression that MRAs are typically as reasonable as their name “Men’s rights activists” suggest, but the premise of the movement is “feminism fucked us over, and we oppose everything feminism stands for.” Meeting feminism and anti-feminism in the middle would probably implode the world. I’m finding them to be quite the mixed bunch. The premise of the reasonable ones is that “men are being fucked over, it needs to be fixed”. But its simply amazing where opposition for the concern of men can come from. As a feminist, that’s why I’m comfortable and supportive here at… Read more »
Not all feminists think exactly alike, because, you know … they are human, and humans are individuals. You can find a wide variety of feminists as is the case in any group. I find now that I`m in my 50s I`m less firey about things and more willing to cooperate, but I think that just comes with time on the planet.
Not all feminists think exactly alike, because, you know … they are human, and humans are individuals.
Precisely. I know and understand that just like any group they are a mixed bag. Which is why I have a bit of a problem with how pointing out any negativity is met with accusations of straw. If they are such a mixed movement is it really that hard to consider the existence of ones that would do such bad stuff?
We’re not. We know the bad ones exist. It’s just…they’re rare, and we’re trying to get across that they’re rare. As a Neopagan, I’ve been around awesome Pagan folk who do tons of research and are fascinated by world religions in general….and I’ve been around the annoying fluff-bunnies who wear way too many crystals and think that they were Cleopatra or Napoleon in a past life. Just because you frequently encounter the suck doesn’t mean the non-suck doesn’t exist, and vice versa. But feminists in general aren’t a bad lot. You’ve just had the horrible luck to encounter a lot… Read more »
We’re not. We know the bad ones exist. It’s just…they’re rare, and we’re trying to get across that they’re rare. I’m still not totally convinced that they are rare. But feminists in general aren’t a bad lot. You’ve just had the horrible luck to encounter a lot of the rotten ones in quick succession. (Avoid AROOO, by the way. They’re not feminists in the traditional sense–they’re rabid man-haters. Appalling website.) Oh I’m not even talking about bottom of the barrel sites like that. Oh it would be nice if all the negativity of that movement could just be passed off… Read more »
I disagree. A LOT of feminists really suck. Now its not their fault, in fact the average feminist is probably better than the average American. But… the average American thinks that sexually assaulting A.K.A. genitally mutilating babies is okay, so its reeaally not saying much. Feminist groups like NOW frequently throwing their weight behind and supporting sexist legislation without any sort of caveat. You have feminists supporting the Vagina Monologues despite its rape apology. Every time a feminist says that women are overwhelmingly the victims of sexual violence they are either unbelievably delusional* or don’t believe that male genital mutilation… Read more »
Here’s the problem Amanda. “MRA” is an identity like any other. You are effectively saying that a man who identifies as an MRA but doesn’t hold anti-feminist views is not an MRA even if he chooses to identify as one. In other words, you’re invalidating his identity because it doesn’t meet your preconceptions. It’s rather like a man who thinks “feminists” are all lesbian separatists who want to exterminate men, and when a woman cares about gender equality but doesn’t hold those views, tells her “Oh, that’s OK, you’re not a feminist”. This is kind of allied to Ozy’s line… Read more »
It could be emotion-shaming? I guess?
Anyone trying to bridge the MRA and feminists should first try to get lions and spotted hyenas to lie down together first. Just so we know they can perform a miracle before trying one with people.
I’m not sure meeting in the middle ever works. More like getting outside the poles and doing something new. Still hard.
Radical centrism, ftw. 🙂
“Radical centrism, ftw.”
That’s Tony Blair’s self-proclaimed political philosophy.
In other words, fuck that.
Oh dear. Loads of people use that term in different ways. Nick Clegg’s also said that the Lib Dems are a ‘radical centrist’ party, which isn’t quite the case. At the minute when a mainstream politician throws on the “radical centrist” hat, it’s probably an attempt to gain votes as opposed to actually reflecting their ideas or policies.
Well, can you explain what the term means outside of mainstream politics? Because that’s the only context I’ve ever encountered it in.
Well political/economically it’s a bit like this: the left is all about the state; the right is all about free markets. The radical centre is a position saying that really both sides are right. Free markets are important and state regulation is important. That argument misses the point…which is that we need to properly apply state regulation to the free market. It’s not either/or. Socially, it’s largely associated with progressivism. I tend to take it further and argue that most binaries are really false dichotomies. This applies to discussions of gender too. So that’s where Julie’s comment comes in. A… Read more »
Well, that’s not radical, it’s just centrist. I say it’s not radical because it’s neither uncommon nor innovative, people have been advocating a mixed private-public economy since, oh, Adam Smith? Probably earlier? And really, even in modern politics, the idea that we should apply state regulation selectively when it’s useful isn’t the kind of mind-blowing game-changer that the word “radical” implies, it’s actually the declared position of almost every contemporary politician. In other words, your idea that this is radical seems to imply a level of intellectual rigidity on both the contemporary left and contemporary right that doesn’t exist. Even… Read more »
The radical is the thought that compromise between what appear to be two opposing sides isn’t the answer…it’s getting rid of the ‘two opposing sides’ itself that’s the answer. Something doesn’t have to be new to be radical.
OK, good point. But I still maintain it’s not radical because what you want to do doesn’t require getting rid of the opposing sides, and is in fact largely what they want to do anyway.
Alrighty, question…are you in the U.K.?
@Heather: No I’m not. But in defense of my ability to comment on British politics, I’ve lived there in the past and have a degree in Political Science with a focus on contemporary European politics (which included the UK) so I feel entitled to talk about it.
Naw, I just meant that the U.S. both the left and right are so polarized right now…and we’d been talking about the U.K. so I was just wondering if that was what you were familiar with. To me the U.K. doesn’t seem quite as polarized as the U.S. at the moment…well except about some things.
But also, I’m not just talking about left and right in politics, but rather most opposing sides in arguments.
Oh right. Well, what you’re saying might be a -little- more true, although it is possibly to exaggerate the ammount of polarisation in the USA in relation to the rest of the world. I mean, you said that the “left is all about the state, the right is all about the free markets”. This isn’t true even in the USA! You couldn’t reasonably claim that the Democrats don’t believe in any role for the free market, and even the most anti-state Republicans, like Ron Paul, believe that the state has a legitimate role to play in regulating the market in… Read more »
Right well I was being a bit simplistic in my explanation because these are internet comments…I mean I get that the two parties are not as simple as I painted them. But also, as I mentioned, this goes beyond economic ideas. And my reference to Julie at the beginning was literally about her response to the perceived opposition between MRAs and feminism.
Well, I get that some level of simplification is required, this isn’t a thesis or even an essay, but you simplified it too much for me to understand I’m afraid. This has actually been a huge derail, I’ve just realised, but I would like to talk about it further – [email protected] if you’re keen. No pressure. As for getting it back to MRAs and feminism, that kind of implies that you would like to see feminism vanish as much as you would either political party… seems like quite a controversial statement? Or is the idea more to reform feminism from… Read more »
I wonder if the thought that meeting in the middle fails because deep down, most people really don’t want to meet in the middle. And while your idea of poles is sound I think that’s going to be a hard go as well. But it might be possible.
‘Stupid’ isn’t actually ableist, contrary to popular belief, ‘stupidity’ has it’s original meaning as a form of emotional reaction, to be ‘stupid’ was to be frozen with terror, traumatized stiff, dumbfounded, etc, how it mutated the way it has eludes me.
Please don’t use the “that’s not its original meaning” argument.
The original meaning of “faggot” was a bundle of sticks, that doesn’t mean it’s OK to use it to describe people.
Hey, lets not use things like “stupid” as an insult. Its ableist as hell.
Hmm…just found this website and thought it would be interesting to read, but now not so sure. There are so many words in the English language not sure why you are afraid to use ones that convey the same sentiment without having to use common swear words – really loses your argument. And it is a big world with lots of varying opinons, when you come across one who thinks differently it is a great opportunity to teach, not rant. But it seems like many online sites have this type of column now, I guess it appeals to some. I… Read more »
I think if we knew the comments Ozy was referring to, this article would look super-mild in comparison?
Moderation is not necessarily a good thing! It is if you want to talk with people who do not share your views. Your comment is a common refrain among feminists. You want to talk about men, but you do not want to actually to or with them, especially if they do not agree with your views. The irony is that you never end up having the conversations you want, at least not with men, because you are calling the very people you want to talk to that they are “stupid fuckheads” of they do not agree with your views. It… Read more »
Wait, wait, what? Of course I think you’re a survivor of abuse, why wouldn’t I? I apologize deeply if anything I’ve said or done has given you this mistaken impression. I may disagree with the opinions of survivors, but I have prided myself on NOT doubting their experiences, and am appalled that I might have given the impression that I did.
Kudo’s to Ozy for the apology. A lot of male victims of females feel like every time they speak, many feminists take it as an attack on women, simply because a male is saying a woman did a bad thing. Irony? Yes. Productive? No Taking male victims seriously is a stepping stone to more of them feeling free to speak. Unfortunately I have read a few feminist blogs lately where ludicrous stats like 95% of victims are female have been thrown around with no references or links to back up their fallacious core. Every time you tell a man, teen… Read more »
Ugh. Let me just say that those individual feminists who deny male sexual assault victims are really bad at feminism. The point isn’t to one-up men or be better than you guys. The point is, sexism has fucked things up for both women AND men, in different ways, and we need to do something about that.
I’d give you a hug, but I’m not sure if that would trigger. Instead, have some e-brownies.
I’ve been reading Ozy’s blog posts at NSWATM for a while now and it’s pretty clear to me that zie is extremely aware that men can be abused by women and does not write in a way that erases the experiences of male abuse survivors. I believe the original commenter was making a generalisation about feminists. It is also unclear when Ozy is supposed to have done all this writing about men that was not intended to address men or engage men in discussion, considering posts on NSWATM used to always have a comment section in which discussions would take… Read more »
Extreme or strong or radical views don’t have to be controversial views, and they definitely don’t have to be the complete opposite of another group’s. Despite the way many people conduct themselves with people of differing ideals, common ground usually DOES exist. Moderation just means it jives better with that status quo. If you’ve got two groups in a disagreement who both want to change the same things, moderation isn’t what you’re after, even if your goal is cooperation. It sounds to me like you’ve been burned, but if you read through the posts of NSWATM, you’re realize: the people… Read more »
If you’ve got two groups in a disagreement who both want to change the same things, moderation isn’t what you’re after, even if your goal is cooperation. The problem is depending the sides in question the difference can actually amount to one side concluding (either right or wrong) that the other side does not want that same thing. Jacob makes a good point here: You want to talk about men, but you do not want to actually to or with them, especially if they do not agree with your views. Its going to be hard to find common ground with… Read more »
The problem is depending the sides in question the difference can actually amount to one side concluding (either right or wrong) that the other side does not want that same thing. That’s not an argument for moderation, that’s an argument against arbitrarily dismissing people. Its going to be hard to find common ground with someone when you try to shut them out of the conversation or limit them to only saying certain things that you already agree with. There’s locking people out of legitimate conversations and there’s shutting down accusations directed at wholly the wrong people. If you get off… Read more »
There’s locking people out of legitimate conversations and there’s shutting down accusations directed at wholly the wrong people. If you get off your cross and say something people can actually choose to agree/disagree with and step out of this circle of You’ve wronged me/not we didn’t/you’re wronging me by saying you didn’t/STFU, you’ll find people will talk to you instead of trying to shut you up. Off my cross? Goodness I’m agnostic. Yes there is is a difference between shutting people out and shutting down wild accusations. The point I was trying to make is that even with that distinction… Read more »
“That’s not true and the people that you think did it don’t exist.” ^ That, I agree, is really frustrating. But I think the following situation happens more often: “Yes, I agree that some people do this and they’re meanies, but -we- are not doing this -now- so please don’t treat us like we are?” So basically people bring their aggression and anger about what some other feminists said and “respond” to a person that said nothing of the sort. But it’s really hard to type out that above response when one is being treated aggressively from the get-go. And… Read more »
So basically people bring their aggression and anger about what some other feminists said and “respond” to a person that said nothing of the sort. But it’s really hard to type out that above response when one is being treated aggressively from the get-go. And I would imagine it’s unsatisfying for an angry person to read and won’t really help unanger them? Oh yes this does is a good point. However the main culprit behind that aggression and anger coming from someone else is because of stuff like what Amanda just said. Notice that unlike Mori and TheL who did… Read more »
I think you would find it very helpful to not attack feminists for believing things which they do not actually believe.
It would help if they had some reason other than “you’re trying to attack feminists!” for their disbelief.
For disbelieving survivor’s experiences? Hon, you’re attacking a straw man. The people you’re fighting don’t exist in the form you think they do.
And what makes you so sure such people don’t exist sweetie?
Sure you can point out that such people aren’t the mainstream of feminism but what exactly allows you to know for sure that what Jacob says did not happen?
Its amazing that when someone points out negativity in feminism all of a sudden a movement of people that is not a monolith is guaranteed to have no negative element in it. I have negative experiences with feminists myself.
The vast majority of feminists tend to automatically believe abuse stories, because lying about being abused is such a dick move that 99.9999999% of people don’t do it.
I’m very sorry you’ve had bad experiences, and that people have been unwilling to believe you when you talk about them. 🙁 People shouldn’t dismiss other people’s pain like that.
Thankfully the bad experiences I have with feminism don’t involve anything as harsh as what Jacob has gone through (for the record I have never been abused) and I have seen a few bits of his treatment first hand. That’s why its so disheartening to hear for the godzillionth time that feminism is both a movement of different types of people and a movement with no negativity in it and any such negativity is either a misunderstanding or an attack on feminism’s apparently negative free image. Mind you I’ve had my dark days where I’ve nearly gone off the deep… Read more »
“And in case you haven’t noticed, pissing off people I don’t like is like chocolate orgasm Christmas to me.” Ozy, I’m sorry that the making of my day came at the expense of somebody else ruining yours, but this is my current Favorite Words On The Internet.
This is pretty much exactly what I was going to say. 🙂
Also, Ozy, can I just say how lovely it is to read your posts and go “yup. yup. yup.” pretty much every single time? Because it’s pretty fucking great. I’ve been reading your blog for ages and never commented, but something prompted me today to just pop in and let you know how much I appreciate you and your writing.
I’ve seen “moderate” used as a synonym for “correct” so many times, and had the argument so many times, and being accused of derailing for having it so many times, that I’ve basically just stopped noticing it. Good luck with that.
Can’t really comment on the rest without seeing the posts in question.